After watching the Super Bowl and seeing the 49ers nearly pull the comeback, and keeping in mind several Seahawks games this season, it seems that these two teams share a common ability that bucks conventional NFL norms. The ability for both of our teams to catch up from a potential blowout.

It just seems strange that conventional NFL wisdom dictates that the advantage of having a big/physical/athletic/fast defense-oriented team with power running and efficient QB is that you will keep most scoring deficits low so even when you fall behind you can catch up. The disadvantage associated with these types of teams is that if you are behind by 3 scores plus, these teams tend to be blown out because they don't have the makeup and build to come back from large deficits.

It is supposed to be teams like the Patriots, Packers, Lions, Falcons, Saints, etc. that invest heavily in their offense so even though they might give up a lot of points, they can potentially erase any large point deficit and are always in the running throughout the game even if they fall behind early.

It's mind-blowing to me that this NFL standard isn't necessarily true anymore. On paper, teams like the Seahawks and 49ers are supposed to keep games close and grind out games. And if they fall behind by 3 scores (SF against BAL, SEA against ATL, etc.) we aren't supposed to be able to stage a comeback and give our teams a chance to win at the end of the game.

Almost seems unfair. That the Seahawks and 49ers have the strengths of a defensive powerhouse (clock control, physically wearing down opponents, keep games close) while also having traits of an offensive juggernaut (potential for big plays, game-changing QBs, ability to score lots of points in a hurry to overcome potential blowouts, etc.). This is why I think the NFC West is going to be INSANELY scary for several seasons to come. The Cardinals and Rams already have the foundations for a top 10 defense set-up on each respective team. All Arizona really needs is an above-average to good QB, and both the Rams and Cardinals need a couple play-making pieces on the offensive side off the ball, and they'll both basically be versions 3.0 and 4.0 of the Seahawks and 49ers.

Sorry for the rambling, just basically pouring my thoughts out in the previous post.

Basic point I'm trying to make:

1. Strong defense + power running teams throughout history tend to have the advantage of generally keeping scores close and grinding out wins.

2. The disadvantage historically is that once these types of teams happen to be blown out by an opposing offense, they lose horribly, as they are not built to score in bunches in a short amount of time.

3. Seems scary that both the Seahawks and the 49ers appear to have all the strengths of the aforementioned teams, but without any of the associated weaknesses or drawbacks.

4. The Seahawks against the Falcons, and the 49ers against the Ravens, show that both teams are able to come back from a 3 score + deficit against Super Bowl caliber opponents and essentially make it so that no lead opposing teams have on the Seahawks or 49ers is safe.

5. The NFC West is probably missing a few offensive playmakers and some good supplemental role players on the Rams and Cardinals from becoming an NFL history-setting division. All 4 teams look incredibly scary for the rest of the NFL. Within the next few seasons I can honestly see a season where the NFC West finishes with 14-2, 12-4, 10-6, and 9-7 records with all four teams having winning seasons and the NFC West sends 3 teams to the playoffs. The NFC West may plausibly go down in one of the following seasons as a record-setting division with the highest cumulative winning percentage the NFL has ever seen. That's my prediction.

It's so crazy to think that the NFC West might have 3 teams from it in the playoffs each year for years to come if the Rams really start to play well with Fisher now and Bradford starting to pick up...Hmmm.. going to be a lot of good football for years to come people, and lets buckle up an enjoy the ride... WOOOHOOO!

I think that there isn't a great defense tht can match the best offenses. You can sometime slow down opponents, you can humiliate bad opponents (AZ anyone) but you cannot stop the great offensive teams any longer (rule changes).

So you can't build around grind-it-out. You need a team that can move the ball quickly. Both teams that played today can do that and while they can slow the opponents down at the end of the game there were lots of scoring....

Winterfell wrote:Sorry for the rambling, just basically pouring my thoughts out in the previous post.

Basic point I'm trying to make:

1. Strong defense + power running teams throughout history tend to have the advantage of generally keeping scores close and grinding out wins.

2. The disadvantage historically is that once these types of teams happen to be blown out by an opposing offense, they lose horribly, as they are not built to score in bunches in a short amount of time.

3. Seems scary that both the Seahawks and the 49ers appear to have all the strengths of the aforementioned teams, but without any of the associated weaknesses or drawbacks.

4. The Seahawks against the Falcons, and the 49ers against the Ravens, show that both teams are able to come back from a 3 score + deficit against Super Bowl caliber opponents and essentially make it so that no lead opposing teams have on the Seahawks or 49ers is safe.

I agree, i just believe the only difference between these comebacks are that the 49ers offense is more "dynamic" then you can say compared to the Seahawks as we are a more "execution" in our style of play.

Kaepernick is more of a gunslinger moving around type of QB, with a strong arm, athletic.Wilson is more a execution, accurate throws, moves around when he knew to, athletic. The only thing that they are any similar is there athleticism. They can make "plays" with there arms or legs.

Because of these 2 QB's, these two teams actually have the ability to come back in the game to win, regardless of who are the play makers, because these QB are unique in their own style and have a knack to make those crazy throws. It all comes down to the defense of both teams, which one is more suitable to bend and not break, that can hold the opponents to a lower score so that these offense can win.

I believe the Seahawks defense has a better ability to bend but not break, even though the Atlantic game was sad, along with many other games... But when i watch these 49ers comeback, most are just dumb mistakes from the other team, or just crazy shit happening... Matt Ryans like several int late in the game. like seriously. Then Ray Rice with the fumbles, etc. But, because Kaepernick with his ability to just outrun DB for the endzone is crazy. Seahawks defense is big in the DB area for harder windows for QB to link up with the WR, Faster LB to keep up with the TE, QB, RB and WR sometimes, and big linemen to stop the run with LBers speed to passrush as well, good combination to stop most teams unless they are an offense jaugernaut like the Falcons, Patriots, Packers, who gave the Seahawks a tough time, but Wilson executing likewise makes those plays with nice throws and with poise.

But we will get to find out six times a year who is the champ of the NFC West, because Pete knows, with Harbaugh, Fisher, and now Bruce Arian(even though he now has to prove himself worthy to be with the top dawgs now), probably the winner of the West will probably be the NFC Champs every year from now on i believe, but we'll find out.

Winterfell wrote:Sorry for the rambling, just basically pouring my thoughts out in the previous post.

Basic point I'm trying to make:

1. Strong defense + power running teams throughout history tend to have the advantage of generally keeping scores close and grinding out wins.

2. The disadvantage historically is that once these types of teams happen to be blown out by an opposing offense, they lose horribly, as they are not built to score in bunches in a short amount of time.

3. Seems scary that both the Seahawks and the 49ers appear to have all the strengths of the aforementioned teams, but without any of the associated weaknesses or drawbacks.

4. The Seahawks against the Falcons, and the 49ers against the Ravens, show that both teams are able to come back from a 3 score + deficit against Super Bowl caliber opponents and essentially make it so that no lead opposing teams have on the Seahawks or 49ers is safe.

I agree, i just believe the only difference between these comebacks are that the 49ers offense is more "dynamic" then you can say compared to the Seahawks as we are a more "execution" in our style of play.

Kaepernick is more of a gunslinger moving around type of QB, with a strong arm, athletic.Wilson is more a execution, accurate throws, moves around when he knew to, athletic. The only thing that they are any similar is there athleticism. They can make "plays" with there arms or legs.

Because of these 2 QB's, these two teams actually have the ability to come back in the game to win, regardless of who are the play makers, because these QB are unique in their own style and have a knack to make those crazy throws. It all comes down to the defense of both teams, which one is more suitable to bend and not break, that can hold the opponents to a lower score so that these offense can win.

I believe the Seahawks defense has a better ability to bend but not break, even though the Atlantic game was sad, along with many other games... But when i watch these 49ers comeback, most are just dumb mistakes from the other team, or just crazy shit happening... Matt Ryans like several int late in the game. like seriously. Then Ray Rice with the fumbles, etc. But, because Kaepernick with his ability to just outrun DB for the endzone is crazy. Seahawks defense is big in the DB area for harder windows for QB to link up with the WR, Faster LB to keep up with the TE, QB, RB and WR sometimes, and big linemen to stop the run with LBers speed to passrush as well, good combination to stop most teams unless they are an offense jaugernaut like the Falcons, Patriots, Packers, who gave the Seahawks a tough time, but Wilson executing likewise makes those plays with nice throws and with poise.

But we will get to find out six times a year who is the champ of the NFC West, because Pete knows, with Harbaugh, Fisher, and now Bruce Arian(even though he now has to prove himself worthy to be with the top dawgs now), probably the winner of the West will probably be the NFC Champs every year from now on i believe, but we'll find out.

I disagree with with your idea of 'dynamic.' Comebacks are the embodiment of 'dynamic,' as are half-time adjustments and the ability to execute them. While both teams have the ability to come back, thus saving themselves from blowouts, the Niners weren't able to overcome their blowout at the hands of the Hawks.

Another thing you're seeming to imply is that Wilson somehow doesn't have a strong arm (he has a cannon!) and is less 'athletic than Kaep (BS!). If you really want to dig, Keap has faster straigh-line running speed, but is no more athletic than Wilson. Then you somehow relate lack of being dynamic to 'execution?' Dynamic or not, you are still 'executing' plays. I sure as heck saw a lot of athletic, and yes, dynamic plays against the niners. One area was the spectacular catches being made and even more obvious was Wilson's ability create plays on the run. If that isn't 'dynamic,' and if some of his runs, expecially where he made Brooks look silly, weren't 'athletic,' I'm wondering what is.

Excuse me while I go take an Aspirin. As John Gruden would say, "my head hurts."